AA第二高频~请求板油提意见！

vcvc1127UID: 2661085

2The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."

The conclusion of the passage is Deerhaven Acres can increase its values in property by adopting the restrictions about landscaping and housepainting made by the local committee. Though is seems realatively sound, it is discernible that, however, the argument is not sufficiently supported by the evidence given, and thus the conclusion does not adopt a strong logic. In order to substantiate the conclusion, the author exploits the case of neighbour Brookville community as premise, that it successfully trippled the yards' property values seven years ago through the regulations of how to landscape the land and what kinds of colors should be painted on the facets of the houses. Neverthe less, there are apparent evidences that the logic premise does not firmly support the conclusion. In all, the author commits two main logical fallacies, the post hoc, ergo propter hoc and faulty analogy.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is committed when the author implicates that the past successful experience of Brookville community can be practical still. But as a matter of fact, the experience of the past does have some discrepencies with the facts now. Maybe the reason for Brookville community to gain effectiveness in the regulations is the fact that unification of how to beautifying the buildings greatly cut down the cost of house keeping and residents were highly satisfied for not being dazzled by the colorful and a divers kinds of house shape. And seven year later, now Brookville community no longer suffers from these kinds of troubles.

When utilizing the case of Brookville community, the commitee of homeowners of Deerhaven Acres makes the msitake of faulty analogy. In the first place, theri own restrictions are not the same as Brookville community's seven years ago. Thus it is unreasonable to guarantee the effectiveness of new rules on landscaping and painting the houses. Besides, the successful experience of Brookville community is not directly linked to Deerhaven Acres. As a matter of fact, they are different areas, and thus, it is like that different policies should be made according to their own situations and features. In addition, the methods of regulating the beautification of houses may not be applicable for the Deerhaven Acres, as the area needs other solutions like providing better secruity management and building more facilities in the community.

In short, the argument is far from enough to attest the conclusion that by adopting their own restricitons of beautifying the houses, the property values in Deerhaven Acres can expect growth as Brookville community did seven years ago. Evidence of whether residents in Deerhaven Acres prefer unified house styles need to be specified in order for argument to be persuasive. Further improvement could be made by ruling out alternative explanations that land value increases due to other factors rather than landscaping and housepainting.

wowoyuweiweiUID: 2754055

1# vcvc1127